JUDGMENT : - 1. This is an application filed by the sole accused who is the daughter of the second respondent to quash further proceedings in CC.1201/2013 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram on the basis of settlement under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. (2.) It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the sole accused in CC.1201/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram. The case was originated on the basis of a complaint filed by the second respondent against the petitioner alleging cruelty and act of neglect to maintain him and also commission of offence under section 24 and 25 of Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 as Crime No.44/2013 of Fort police station of Thiruvananthapuram District and after investigation, final report was filed and it was taken on file as CC.No.1201/2013 and pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram. Now, the matter has been settled between the parties and the petitioner is looking after the affairs of the second respondent and on account of the settlement, second respondent does not want to prosecute the petitioner and no purpose will be served by proceeding with the case as well. Since it is a non-compoundable offence and they could not file application before the court below for this purpose. So the petitioner has no other remedy except to approach this court seeking the following relief: - "to quash Annexure-1 charge as against the petitioner in C.C.No.1201/2013 of Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram in the interest of justice". 2. Second respondent appeared through counsel and submitted that the matter has been settled and he is satisfied with the conduct of the petitioner who is his daughter and he does not want to prosecute the petitioner any longer on account of the fact that she is now looking after him and he filed an affidavit stating these facts. 3. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction and so he prayed for allowing the application. 4. Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there will not be any laches on the part of the petitioner in looking after her father in future. 5. 3. The counsel for the petitioner also submitted that in view of the settlement, there is no possibility of conviction and so he prayed for allowing the application. 4. Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there will not be any laches on the part of the petitioner in looking after her father in future. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no other case against the petitioner and considering the purpose of the Act it is not a matter to be quashed invoking the power under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 6. It is an admitted fact that the second respondent is the father of the petitioner. It is quite unfortunate that nowadays there is tendency not to care the welfare of the old parents by the younger generation and old parents & senior citizens are looking for help and have to take their shelter in the old age home. Since such attitude is increasing and the parents are left without any care and neglected by the children, Legislature thought that in order to protect the senior citizens and parents and make the moral obligation of the children to look after their parents into a legal obligations, came with an enactment by name Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 in a country like India where there is a culture to respect mother, father, teacher and then God in their order of preference and so much respect has been given to mother and father. Present day younger generation though not all but atleast some are having a feeling that keeping their parents with them will be difficult for them and it will cause hindrance to their happy life. They are forgetting the fact that it is due to the hardwork and sacrifice that their parents have done that they are enjoying the present status and life and they have got a raciprocal moral responsibility to take care of them in their old age. Further, presence of grand parents will be a solace for the grand children as they will get the moral teaching from them to build up the responsible and disciplined character to follow in their life. They are also forgetting the fact that they will also one day become old and if their children show the same attitude towards them, how much pain they will feel at that time. They are also forgetting the fact that they will also one day become old and if their children show the same attitude towards them, how much pain they will feel at that time. If they realize this fact then they will not shirk their responsibility to show respect and care the aged parents and senior citizens. They don't want their wealth but what they want only the concern of their children to them. 7. When the second respondent has to meet with some unwanted act from the petitioner which caused him agony, he was compelled to move the police by filing a complaint alleging offence under section 24 of the above Act and on that basis a case was registered as Crime No.44/2013 against the petitioner alleging offences under section 24 and 25 of the said Act and after investigation final report was filed and it is now pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram as CC.No.1201/2013. Now, due to the intervention of family members and well-wishers of both parties, the matter has been settled between the parties and wisdom has dawn on the petitioner that it is her responsibility to look after her father during his old age and now they are living together. The purpose of this Act is not to punish the person neglecting to maintain the parents and respect a senior citizen but to make them to understand the responsibility and fulfil their responsibilities towards the parents and senior citizens. Considering the fact that the matter has been settled and father is now satisfied with the arrangements provided by his daughter considering his welfare, this court has to consider that fact and allowing the prosecution to continue will only disturb the relationship that has been now restored on account of the settlement. 8. Considering the fact that the matter has been settled and father is now satisfied with the arrangements provided by his daughter considering his welfare, this court has to consider that fact and allowing the prosecution to continue will only disturb the relationship that has been now restored on account of the settlement. 8. Further in the decision reported in Gian Singh V. State of Punjab [2012 (4) KLT 108 (SC)], Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that in cases where family relationship are involved and on account of some misunderstanding in the family relationship criminal cases have been registered and if the matter has been settled between the parties and their old relationship has been restored, then the pendency of criminal cases should not be a hurdle for such relationship to continue and even if non-compoundable offences are committed even then court should honour such settlement which restored their relationship and bring harmony in the family and quash the proceedings invoking the power under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. 9. So in view of the dictum laid on in the above decision, and also considering the fact that it is a matter between father and daughter and the matter has been settled and daughter has understood her responsibility to look after her father and care for the welfare of her father during his remaining period and now looking after him happily and the father is also satisfied with the present attitude of the petitioner, this court feels that it is a fit case where the power under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has to be invoked to honour the settlement which brought harmony between the father and daughter and the pendency of this case should not be a hurdle for such relationship. So the petition is allowed and further proceedings in CC.No.1201/2013 (Crime No.44/2103 of Fort police station) of Thiruvananthapuram District pending before Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Thiruvananthapuram as against the petitioner is quashed. Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court immediately.